Proposals from the Signatories Institutions for Brazil, Civil Society and Government positioning to the
negotiations to the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20)

CONTEXT

The UN Rio+20 Conference, as we all work to guarantee its success and effectiveness, is a
privileged experience to discuss measures and mechanisms to implement decisions and agreements
firmed 20 years ago, at the Rio(Eco) 92 Conference. The latter was able to advance themes previously
proposed, still in an elementary way, at the Stockholm Conference, in 1972, and to produce a robust set
of agreements among nations, expressed under the 27 Principles of the Rio Declaration, the Agenda 21, 1
the Declaration of Forest Principles and the Conventions on Biological Diversity, Climate Change and to
Combat Desertification. It also opened the way to later agreements, such as the Millennium Declaration
and the Millennium Development Goals, the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, the Latin American
and Caribbean Initiative for Sustainable Development, the Monterrey Consensus of the International
Conference on Financing for Development, the Doha Declaration, the Barbados Programme of Action for
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, the Mauritius Strategy and the Bali Strategic
Plan for Technology Support and Capacity-building. It will be Rio+20 responsibility, therefore, to build a
substantial political agreement, increasing the implementation capacity of the multilateral agreements
previously signed and provide effective mechanisms to decisions already taken.

There are expressive contextual differences between the last big conferences (Stockholm, 1972
Rio, 1992 Johannesburg, 2002) and the 2012 summit. The first three represented, in their discussions
and decisions, parallel worlds in relation to the economic context to which they were immersed in. The
Stockholm Conference took place at the end of the period of real effectiveness of the Bretton Woods
institutions and preceded two oil crises (1973 and 1979) that changed the global economy. Rio92
occurred along with the process of economic deregulations, the overcoming of national frontiers and
the reduction of Social protection networks, in contradiction with the sustainable development effort.
The agreements generated from Rio92 were fundamental, but were not implemented, as they
contradicted the logic of a growing globalization that also tried to sustain itself. The Johannesburg
Summit happened at the climax of the movement of financialization of the global economy, when the world's capital was allocated predominantly in service of its own reproduction In each of these historical moments it was verified a disparity among the summit's proposals and deliberations and daily
decisions from governments and businesses. With these, the traditional economic vision and logic
predominated over the political agreements.

Rio+20 will face the challenge and the opportunity to analyze the global crisis started in 2008
and unfolded in 2010/2011 , taking into account the exhaustion in the traditional development model
and the reinforced imposition of short term economic imperatives over political decisions, proposing a
change of course based on sustainable development principles and imperatives. Surely, there will be
conflicts of interests and of visions, being the responsibility of more advanced voices, Brazil among
them, to defend a political affirmation in its multilateral dimension with impacts in internal orders, also
leading to the end of the crisis. In this sense, concrete proposals must be presented to internalize
decisions in the real politics and in the real economy, in their global and local dimensions, observing the
principle of non-regression in relation to previous commitments. If Rio+20 is not able to construct this
path, there will be a great risk to miss the accumulation of all decisions mentioned above, which are
fundamental in building a fairer, inclusive, whole, and environmentally-friendly global order. With this
context, and with this spirit, we offer the following suggestions, proposing the internalization of Rio92
decisions in the political sphere, as well as in the economic sphere through the adoption of goals and
concrete actions that, we believe, will contribute to overcome the crisis and to build a new development
paradigm.

1. CONSTRUCTION OF THE TRANSITION TO A GREEN ECONOMY IN A POVERTY ERRADICATION
CONTEXT

Given the accumulation of compromises and agreements shown above, as well as the difficulties in
implementation imposed by choices based on a short term financial-economic vision, it is necessary to
develop a road map to internalize compromises in the economic order, internally and externally,
fostering a transition agenda to a green, inclusive and responsible economy. These concepts are
understood as follows:

A green economy seeks to ensure a friendly relationship between society's production processes and
natural processes, promoting conservation, restoration and the sustainable use of ecosystems, treating
the services they offer to life as assets of public interest.

An inclusive economy seeks to meet the needs and the rights of all human beings, promoting a
balanced development among financial, human, social and natural capitals, equitable distribution of
wealth and of income-generating opportunities, access to public goods and services, securing decent life
conditions for all the population, eradicating poverty and reducing social inequalities.

A responsible economy seeks to strengthen a set of humanistic and universal principles and values that
sustain the democratic functioning of societies and markets, through the development of ethical and
integrity values, promoting a transparency culture and mechanisms to fight corruption.

For the internalization of compromises in national economies, we propose that all participating
countries at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) commit to adopt the
following directives:

i. Adoption, progressively, of a new national accountability standard to measure development,
while the United Nations system develops a standard that could, in the medium term, be
adopted by all nations (according to item 2.ii). The new national standard should redefine the
concept of prosperity at a national level, considering not only the effective GDP (for mediation)
and the potential GDP (for planning purposes), but also the costs of natural assets and services
implied in the production of goods and availability of services, the social impacts resulting from
the growth model adopted and the level of national income vis-a-vis the local population's access
to adequate sanitation, health, education, consumption, mobility, culture and well being. The
new national standards should, therefore, measure the natural, social, human and financial
capitals, modeled in the studies developed by the Stiglitz-Sem-Fatoussi Commission and by
research conducted by Ethical Markets in partnership with GlobeScan (Beyond GDP);

ii. Pricing of carbon and the creation of an internal carbon market. It is suggested to study the
adoption of a local standard for carbon pricing, considering the characteristics of local markets
and economic agents, as well as the creation of an internal carbon market so the agents can
operate and contribute to the achievement of national emission-reduction goals;

iii. Payment for ecosystem s services. It is suggested to study forms of pricing of natural resources
and environmental services as a way to make individual perceptions and market controls
effective, leading to productive systems that considers the closed, full cycle of production and the
sharing of generated benefits from the use of biodiversity and of traditional knowledge;

iv. Establishment of Minimum Operating Standards. It is suggested to study and define local
minimum sustainable operating standards for public national companies and utilities, as well as
national companies that operate internationally (in issues such as decent work relations
inclusion of minorities and equality , socio-environmental practices compatible with sustainable
development and production's closed cycle), or submitting them to global minimum operating
standards, when these are already established (see item 2.1.v). National states must also create
conditions in order for multinational corporations to operate locally based on their best world
standard, when this is above the local or global minimum. Furthermore, it is suggested to include
among the minimum operating standards as a requirement for large national companies that
operate internationally, as well as to public companies and utilities the public annual disclosure
of sustainability activities modeled in global reporting standards (e.g. GRI) or a justification of
impossibility of report;

v. Inclusion of four aspects in the decision-making process: social, environmental, economic and
ethical, encouraging a culture of peace and solidarity among nations and translating in concrete
objectives on poverty eradication, reduction of inequalities, promotion of decent work conditions
and of a system of integrity and combat against corruption;

vi. Linkage between public and private actions in developing and following through with the 3
national plans. Additionally, the articulation between governments, intergovernmental
organizations and non-governmental organizations, market and civil society based (major
groups), is also fundamental for the transition to a new economic model;

vii. Adoption of sustainable purchasing policies for governments, in a way to redirect local
production, as well as measures that encourage both production with less pressure on natural
resources, low emissions and decent work conditions studying differentiated taxation regimes
to encourage it as well as new consumption patterns, establishing mechanisms that promote
the acquisition of more sustainable products. At the same time that production patterns are
shifting, it is imperative that there is a change of culture and behavior from consumers. In this
sense, it is suggested to promote responsible advertising that acts as guidance to consumers, as
proposed by the EthicMark® Award for Advertising that Uplifts the Human Spirit and Society.
Finally, it is necessary to encourage the sustainable treatment of waste from producers as well as
consumers, and the financing of R&D processes to develop sustainable products;

viii. Effective investments, public and private, in a new education model focusing on developing
values and culture aiming to develop citizens aware of their socio-cultural heritage, of their
position in relation to the environment and of their power to influence and their responsibility as
citizens, voters, parents, consumers, investors and entrepreneurs. Assessment mechanisms on
the internalization of concepts and practices from a student perspective can be particularly
effectives in this sense;

ix. Incorporation to regulation tools, inducting the planning and development of sustainable cities,
through urban and rural infrastructure investments, such as greater sanitation coverage,
depollution and recovery of water resources, promotion of a sustainable urban transportation
system and energy generation from a diversified and renewable matrix.

Even as the plans are of national character, it is encouraged, whenever possible, the exchange of
experiences and the search for cooperation among countries.

2. CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

Regarding the internalization of commitments in national and international politics, we understand as
fundamental:

2.1 A real commitment from countries to align their national planning and development agendas
with sustainable development criteria, through the elaboration of national plans on sustainable
development, to be presented to the new "umbrella body", to be created within the United
Nations (see item 2.2), within a deadline convened with the parties (suggested, initially, two to
four years).

The plans should be adapted to the different local realities and should contemplate, necessarily,
a minimum agenda, consisting of goals in:

a) Reduction of the ecological footprint, considering reducing the consumption of resources,
the impacts on ecosystems and their conservation and restoration;

b) Poverty eradication and reduction of social, political and economic inequalities,
translating into access to goods, income and public services;

c) Implementation of a system of integrity and transparency for commitments in public-
private relations, including a mandatory public annual disclosure of sustainability policies
and practices by multinational corporations, public companies and utilities, or justification
of impossibility of report.

It will be the responsibility of the United Nations to Encourage and Support National Plans and
to promote spaces for sharing and exchanges that provoke synergies and scale gains, through:

i. Establishment of a International Fund to guarantee the feasibility of the national plans,
which could be based on: the proportional contributive capacity of member countries of the
United Nations, advancing the agreement (during the 34 Session of the UN General
Assembly , 1980), which was never fulfilled, of 0.7% of GDP from developed countries, to 1%
of GDP; resources from the rights of maritime and air space usage; and a tax of 0,05% on
speculative international financial transactions (Tobin Tax). These resources would be
redistributed according to voluntary goals and commitments agreed by nations, submitted
to external and independent accountability.

ii. Adoption, by the UN, of a new national accountability standard to measure development
and monitor the national voluntary plans, taking into consideration recent research
among which we highlight the works of the Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi Commission and the studies
conducted by Ethical Markets in partnership with GlobeScan (Beyond GDP) , as well as the
experiences from the various nations and blocs of nations on defining their internal
prosperity and development standards (according to item 1.i). The accumulation of these
researches and information, and their thorough evaluation, should develop, in the medium
run, into a new standard that can be adopted by all nations;

iii. Pricing of carbon and creation of a global carbon market. It is suggested to study the
adoption of a global standard for carbon pricing, as well as the creation of a global carbon
market. Both the carbon pricing and the operational model of the carbon market shall
consider countries' experiences and the overall information from the implementation of the
Clean Development Mechanisms (CDM), within the Kyoto Protocol context;

iv. Payment for ecosystems services. It is suggested to study forms of pricing of natural
resources and environmental services as way to direct production systems to a closed cycle.
Experiences from countries and blocs will serve as reference for global definitions that shall
also consider the effective access to biodiversity and the sharing of generated benefits from
its use, in accordance with previous commitments (Convention on Biological Diversity);

v. Establishment of Global Minimum Operating Standards. It is suggested to establish, at a
global level, minimum operating standards for multinational corporations (in issues such as
decent work relations inclusion of minorities and equality , socio-environmental practices
compatible with sustainable development and productions' closed cycle); Furthermore, it is
suggested to present annual disclosure reports of sustainability activities modeled in global
reporting standards (e.g. GRI) or a justification of impossibility of report;

vi. Redefinition of a Geography of Technical and Scientific Cooperation, suggesting the
coordination of efforts and the creation of networks that encourage the exchange of
experiences, expertise and skills among regions that are similar geographically (organized by
biomes), geopolitically, and by their development stage, in a way to create synergies and
accelerate scale gain, with a resulting lowering of costs to the transition agenda.

2.2 Overcoming the current global institutional failure, modifying the institutional framework both in
the national and global spheres, in a way to eliminate the imbalance among the four sustainable
development dimensions (social, economic, environmental and ethical). Only the creation of a
new institutional framework can offer the mechanisms of coordination, cooperation, evaluation
and control necessary to an ambitious transition agenda. 5

In this sense, it is proposed to strengthen the management systems in the social, environmental
and ethical dimensions within the United Nations, and the creation of an "umbrella body"
responsible for planning, coordination, encouragement and implementation of sustainable
development commitments. This new body, that shall have a hierarchical level comparable to
the Security Council and absorb the Commission on Sustainable Development, shall provide
directives to other bodies, agencies and programmes within the United Nations system, specially:
ECOSOC, UNEP, UNDP, WTO, WCO, ILO, UNIDO, UNCTAD, FAO, OHCHR, UNFPA and UNESCO. The
new body shall also articulate policies and efforts from multilateral financial institutions
(International Monetary Fund and the World Bank), settle disputes, mediate conflict of interests
and litigate within the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court, gather
and provide subsidies to other multilateral organizations (such as G20 and G77), and maintain a
dialogue and consulting forums with non-governmental organizations (market and civil society
based), guaranteeing legitimacy to decisions and processes.

Besides being responsible for the encouragement and support to the agendas and national plans,
this new multilateral institutional architecture would intervene in all situations of social, financial,
food, energy, environmental, and cultural crises and in any other issues related to sustainable
development.

Signatories Institutions

(In Alphabetical order, with international organizations highlighted in bold)